VadeLab
AllowedFirst-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)·

Tribunal Sets Fair Market Rent for Tenancy

Case No.

📌 In brief

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) decided on a fair market rent of £965 per month for a property in Hastings. This decision was based on comparable evidence and conditions, ensuring a fair outcome for both the tenant and landlord.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is entitled to a fair market rent determination based on comparable properties and conditions.

Topics

tenancy disputesrent determination

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Housing Act 1988 s.14

Under the Housing Act 1988, section 14 allows a tenant under an assured tenancy to apply to a tribunal to challenge the rent payable under the tenancy. The tribunal will then determine a fair market rent based on comparable conditions and evidence. However, applications cannot be made if the rent is already set by a previous determination under this section or if more than six months have passed since the start of the tenancy.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The Tribunal determined a fair market rent for a property based on comparable evidence and conditions.

📜 Headnote Official document

The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) determined a fair market rent of £965 per month for a property in Hastings, taking into account comparable evidence and conditions. The decision took effect from 1 February 2025.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

MR22 First-tier Tribunal – Property Chamber File Ref No. HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0611

Notice of the Tribunal Decision and Register of Rents under Assured Periodic Tenancies (Section 14 Determination)

Housing Act 1988 Section 14

Address of Premises The Tribunal members were 71 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE]

[NAME] [NAME] Judge I Arrow

Landlord [RESPONDENT] c/o [APPELLANT], 94A [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

Tenant Mrs [APPELLANT]

1. The rent is: £ 965.00 Per Calendar Month (excluding water rates and council tax but including any amounts in paras 3)

2. The date the decision takes effect is: 1 February 2025

3. The amount included for services is not applicable n/a Per n/a

4. Date assured tenancy commenced 1st August 2013

5. Length of the term or rental period Monthly

6. Allocation of liability for repairs Landlord

7. Furniture provided by landlord or superior landlord None

8. Description of premises 2 bedroom ground floor flat.

[NAME] of Decision 6 March 2025

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL PROPERTY CHAMBER (RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY) Case Reference : HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0611 Property : 71 [ADDRESS] [POSTCODE] Applicant Tenant : [COUNSEL] :

None

Respondent Landlords : [RESPONDENT] : [COMPANY] of Application :

Determination of a Market Rent sections 13 & 14 of the Housing Act 1988

Tribunal Members : [NAME] [NAME] Judge I Arrow Date of Application : 10th January 2025 Date of Decision :

6th March 2025

DECISION

The Tribunal determines a rent of £965 per calendar month with effect from 1st February 2025.

HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0611 2 SUMMARY REASONS

Background 1. On 27th December 2024 the Landlord’s Agent served a notice under Section 13(2) of the Housing Act 1988 which proposed a new rent of £1,100 per month in place of the existing rent of £580 per month to take effect from 1st February 2025.

2. On 10th January 2025 under Section 13(4)(a) of the Housing Act 1988, the Tenant referred the Landlord’s notice proposing a new rent to the Tribunal for determination of a market rent. Inspection 3. The Tribunal did not inspect the property but considered this case based on the papers provided by the parties and information freely available on the internet. Evidence

4. The Tribunal has considered the written submissions provided in the Application from the Tenant and the Statement from the Landlord. Determination and Valuation 5. Having given consideration to the comparable evidence provided by the parties and of its own expert, general knowledge of rental values in the area, the Tribunal determines that the open market rent for the property in good tenantable condition would be £1,050 per calendar month.

6. Such a tenancy would normally include white goods, carpets, curtains/blinds and associated fittings to all be provided by the Landlord.

7. In this case the property is not let in such condition or with white goods, carpets and curtains all supplied so some adjustments to the ‘open market rent’ are necessary. In addition, the Tribunal has made the adjustments for the lack of central heating/ provision of electric heating and the Tenants installation of a shower and shower screen.

8. The full valuation is shown below: Full open market rent in good condition £1,050 Less deductions for:- Tenant’s provision of white goods

£30 Tenant’s provision of carpets and curtains

£25

No central heating/ electric heating provided

£25 Tenant’s shower and shower screen

£5

____ TOTAL RENT PAYABLE PER MONTH

£965

HAV/21UD/MNR/2025/0611 3 9. The Tribunal therefore decided that the rent at which the subject property might reasonably be expected to be let in the open market by a willing Landlord under the terms of this assured tenancy was £965 per month.

10. The Tenant made no representation that the starting date for the new rent specified in the Landlord’s notice would cause the Tenant undue hardship.

11.

Accordingly, the Tribunal directed that the new rent of £965 per month should take effect from 1st February 2025 this being the date specified in the notice.

APPEAL PROVISIONS

These summary reasons are provided to give the parties an indication as to how the Tribunal made its decision. If either party wishes to appeal this decision, they should first make a request for full reasons and the details of how to appeal will be set out in the full reasons. Any request for full reasons should be made within a month. Any subsequent application for permission to appeal should be made on Form RP PTA.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The tenant is entitled to a fair market rent based on comparable properties.
  • The rent should be adjusted according to the condition of the property.
  • Local circumstances and amenities provided by the tenant must be considered in determining the rent.
  • The rent determination must reflect the actual conditions of the property.
  • The Housing Act 1988 supports the tenant's entitlement to a fair market rent.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The decision set a fair market rent of £965 per month for a property in Hastings.

Who was involved?

The tenant and landlord were involved in the tenancy dispute.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on comparable evidence and conditions, ensuring a fair market rent determination.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Housing Act 1988, specifically section 14, was applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the comparable evidence used to determine the fair market rent.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the tenant, setting a fair market rent.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation can seek a fair market rent determination through the First-tier Tribunal.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Comparable evidence and conditions were crucial in determining the fair market rent.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, decisions like this can be appealed if either party disagrees with the outcome.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is recommended to get advice from a qualified solicitor for cases involving rent determination.

Official source: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.